[Colorado-Talk] Important:!! Call to action!

[Yevette Del Conte]

Hello,
My name is Yvette and I work for the Denver regional Council of Governments
(DRCOG) in the aging and disability resource center. I am totally blind and
I use Uber access on demand   to go into the office building on 17th and
Arapahoe two times a week. This service is not only necessary for me being
a Blind employee and member of the community but I feel it is a human
right. I would like to be supportive, but I am unsure how to do so. I am
willing to attend in person and give my testimony. but would like some
guidance around
  What I want to say to be most effective. I Look forward to hearing from
you.

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 15:25 adams.pipi--- via Colorado-Talk <
colorado-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> On September 30, 2025 the RTD board of directors are going to vote on the
> future of access on demand. It is so important for as many of us to show up
> in person and tell our personal stories as to why AOD is so important to
> us. We need to come together as one large group to protect this service as
> well as getting RTD to improve their services for disabled riders overall.
>
> If you have any questions or would like some assistance in putting
> together something to speak on, please feel free to reach out.
>
> Each person has 3 minutes to speak.
>
> The meeting is at 5:30PM on September 30th.
>
> The address is:1660 Blake St.
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1660+Blake+St.+Denver,+CO?entry=gmail&source=g>
>
> Denver, CO
> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1660+Blake+St.+Denver,+CO?entry=gmail&source=g>
>
> There will also be a zoom option, but we encourage everyone who can to
> come in person. If you are not comfortable speaking in front of people,
> please feel free to write your testimony. Any and all support is so helpful.
>
> I am pasting information from the previous meeting with their new
> recommendations.
>
> Hi, all,
>
> I wanted to post this while it’s fresh in my mind.
>
> Before the Committee could even vote on the Board’s motion with the $2.50
> fare and unrestricted area, Director Harwick amended it with a new proposal
> which he called a compromise:
>
> A $6.50 fare with no area restrictions but with hourly restrictions, which
> would allow multi-stop trips.
>
> I’m not sure how going from $2.50 to $6.50 can be defined as a compromise,
> but I digress.
>
> This proposal passed, 5-1, so that’s what will be recommended to the Board
> on September 30. Director O’Keefe was the lone no vote.
>
>
>
> I should note that Director Buzek wasn’t there, and he has always been a
> supporter of keeping the program as-is as much as possible.
>
> Also, several directors who have been supportive of our positions are not
> on this committee. The original staff recommendation with the $6.50 fare
> and area/hourly restrictions passed this committee 5-2 back in July, yet
> the full Board significantly amended that proposal.
>
> So, this is a setback, but there is every reason to believe we can
> convince the full Board to amend this recommendation as well. One reason
> for my guarded optimism is that Director Nicholson advocated for a $1.50
> fare for LIIV program recipients. He ultimately withdrew his amendment when
> Deborah Johnson pointed out that LIIV fares are typically 50% of the
> regular fare, and this would make the Access on Demand fare significantly
> lower than the Access-a-Ride fare.
>
> However, the solution seems simple. Make the AOD fare $4.50, and the LIIV
> fare by definition would be $2.25, not much more than the $1.50 he was
> advocating for. So, I think we really need to push that and that it should
> make sense to the Board.
>
> What I do not understand is the Committee’s apparent willingness to accept
> staff delineating the cost of wheelchair accessible vehicles as part of AOD
> without accounting for this by lowering  the Access-a-Ride budget. So,
> they’re accounting for this money in two places, which is certainly not an
> accepted accounting practice and appears solely designed to make the AOD
> program seem more expensive.
>
> Committee members were also silent on the inclusion of cutting bus routes
> in the memo, which was slammed by a few public commenters, including our
> Maureen, as almost a threat.
>
> We even got admonished by Director O’Keefe to only attribute the best of
> motives to what people are doing.
>
>
>
> So, bottom line, we still have more work to do on September 30. Dr. Folska
> hit the nail right on the head when she commented how stressful it is for
> us to constantly be fighting to protect this program that has done so much
> for so many so efficiently.
>
> But we’re gonna have to go back to the ring for one more round. Directors,
> particularly Harwick and Nicholson, seem determined to move this forward.
> They comfort themselves by saying that they can review it in a year and
> make any needed changes, seemingly oblivious to the fact that a year is a
> very long time if you suddenly can’t use a service you’ve come to depend
> on. That’s exactly what’s going to happen to me if Harwick’s proposal is
> adopted, since I work a lot of overnight shifts at Amazon, which means my
> rides either two or from, depending on the shift, will not fall within the
> AOD service hours.
>
>
>
> So, please, let’s have all hands on deck at the September 30 meeting.
> Apparently, we’re not getting through sufficiently, so we’ll have to raise
> our voices again, loudly and proudly, as we always do.
>
>
>
> We’ll have more specific info on the September 30 meeting in the next
> couple weeks.
>
> Thanks for all you do!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Colorado-Talk mailing list
> Colorado-Talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Colorado-Talk:
>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/ydelconte%40gmail.com
> List archives can be found at <
> http://www.nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20250918/17ca1af4/attachment.htm>